Most Colourful SA/CA?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
I agree on the Salvini and Red Tiger Mota.


Here are some from my tanks:

Vibrant yellow with teal on this Hypsophrys Nicaraguensis female
DSC_0219.JPG



Gold with pearled scales on this Geophagus Brasiliensis male
DSC_0254.JPG


Subtle yellow and teal highlights on this Amatitliana Siquia 'Rio Cabayo' female
DSC_0073.JPG

DSC_0219.JPG

DSC_0254.JPG

DSC_0073.JPG
 
There are at least 5 Heros species (H. appendiculatus, efasciatus, notatus, sverus, spurious) and sp. "red shoulder"....plus lots of regional varients and underscribed ones that could be different species or not (depending on the icthyologist doing the description and their predilection for lumping or grouping).

Is a flowerhorn any more or less of a designer pet than say an electric red discus (which may or may not technically be a hybrid...depending on discus taxonomy's prevailing opinion this week).

And to go back to OP's question: Many designer fish are DESIGNED to have MORE COLOR than wild-type ones. That's the point ;)
Trying to establish a bright-line distinction between line bred cichlids and hybrids ones, especially when the genetic make-up of fish like red severums, fancy discus, "neon" jewels, etc. is not known...just doesn't make sense.

Back to the OPs question.

My vote for most colorful natural cichlid is for Crenichichla sp. lugubris atabapo: http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?id=2675

Matt

koltsix said:
As far as I know there's only 2 Heros, Heros efasciatus and Heros severus and only efasciatus is a substrate spawner while severus is a mouthbrooder. The common Severum we see is esfasciatus and the red spot is not a hybrid between the two but a line bred version of the Gold strain. No different then how a Albino Tiger Oscar was essentially created. When you look up true hybrids you see they have no scientific name(Flowerhorns, Blood Parrots, Red Texas etc) while in the cichlid companions the Gold strain is identified as Heros efasciatus just like a Albino Tiger Oscar is identified as Astronotus ocellatus. Because in both instances the're just line bred versions of the original stain as you put it aberrations.

As for being more natural I'd say yes color morphs and line bred fish are more natural since hybrids tend to be infertile while line bred tend to be fertile. The more natural and easy breeding is for a fish the more natural the fish is in my opinion as it lends to them being viable in natural conditions. Plus we see color morphs in different localities, which means color morphs are natural occurring we just take a natural process one step further. I personally have no problem with hybrids but I love them for what they are just an example of a designer pet.
Click to expand...
 
This was the best most colorful cichlid I've ever owned.

020.JPG

020.JPG
 
an old picture of my Trimac
100_2160.jpg


His colors don't have the same pop any more but he's still gorgeous
 
dogofwar said:
There are at least 5 Heros species (H. appendiculatus, efasciatus, notatus, sverus, spurious) and sp. "red shoulder"....plus lots of regional varients and underscribed ones that could be different species or not (depending on the icthyologist doing the description and their predilection for lumping or grouping).

Is a flowerhorn any more or less of a designer pet than say an electric red discus (which may or may not technically be a hybrid...depending on discus taxonomy's prevailing opinion this week).

And to go back to OP's question: Many designer fish are DESIGNED to have MORE COLOR than wild-type ones. That's the point ;)
Trying to establish a bright-line distinction between line bred cichlids and hybrids ones, especially when the genetic make-up of fish like red severums, fancy discus, "neon" jewels, etc. is not known...just doesn't make sense.

Back to the OPs question.

My vote for most colorful natural cichlid is for Crenichichla sp. lugubris atabapo: http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?id=2675

Matt
Click to expand...

It's why I said 2 Heros that I know of as there is the possibility that there are more regional variants that can be classified within the group I'm unaware of. A species is often defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. Hybrids are offspring resulting from the interbreeding between two animals or plants of different species. So as far as I understand those definitions breeding within the same species isn't hybridization. So breeding a Heros to another Heros wouldn't be a hybrid.

Flowerhorns which are bred from different species are as far as my understanding. It's why I gave the example of the mule and horse. Both are genetically similar but a horse is a horse and a mule is a mule and a donkey is a donkey. They look alike and are classified as equines but breeding between them is hybridization because a donkey and a horse aren't the same species. I hope I'm being clear in my point as you've only really rebutted how many Heros there are.

This is my understanding of the term hybrid and if you have a different one I'm glad to hear it, but would like you to explain then what a hybrid is. It is also my understanding of line breeding and color morphs hence my opinion. You seem to disagree but aren't laying the terms or standards to your understanding of the definitions so I'm confused. What is a hybrid in your opinion and what separates them from other terminologies such as line breeding?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom